scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Alexander Golbraikh

Bio: Alexander Golbraikh is an academic researcher from University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The author has contributed to research in topics: Quantitative structure–activity relationship & Applicability domain. The author has an hindex of 32, co-authored 58 publications receiving 6988 citations. Previous affiliations of Alexander Golbraikh include Latvian Academy of Sciences & University of Orléans.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is argued that the high value of LOO q2 appears to be the necessary but not the sufficient condition for the model to have a high predictive power, which is the general property of QSAR models developed using LOO cross-validation.
Abstract: Validation is a crucial aspect of any quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) modeling. This paper examines one of the most popular validation criteria, leave-one-out cross-validated R2 (LOO q2). Often, a high value of this statistical characteristic (q2 > 0.5) is considered as a proof of the high predictive ability of the model. In this paper, we show that this assumption is generally incorrect. In the case of 3D QSAR, the lack of the correlation between the high LOO q2 and the high predictive ability of a QSAR model has been established earlier [Pharm. Acta Helv. 70 (1995) 149; J. Chemomet. 10(1996)95; J. Med. Chem. 41 (1998) 2553]. In this paper, we use two-dimensional (2D) molecular descriptors and k nearest neighbors (kNN) QSAR method for the analysis of several datasets. No correlation between the values of q2 for the training set and predictive ability for the test set was found for any of the datasets. Thus, the high value of LOO q2 appears to be the necessary but not the sufficient condition for the model to have a high predictive power. We argue that this is the general property of QSAR models developed using LOO cross-validation. We emphasize that the external validation is the only way to establish a reliable QSAR model. We formulate a set of criteria for evaluation of predictive ability of QSAR models.

3,176 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: There is additional evidence that there exists no correlation between the values of q2 for the training set and accuracy of prediction (R2) for the test set and it is argued that this observation is a general property of any QSAR model developed with LOO cross-validation.
Abstract: Quantitative Structure–Activity Relationship (QSAR) models are used increasingly to screen chemical databases and/or virtual chemical libraries for potentially bioactive molecules. These developments emphasize the importance of rigorous model validation to ensure that the models have acceptable predictive power. Using k nearest neighbors (kNN) variable selection QSAR method for the analysis of several datasets, we have demonstrated recently that the widely accepted leave-one-out (LOO) cross-validated R2 (q2) is an inadequate characteristic to assess the predictive ability of the models [Golbraikh, A., Tropsha, A. Beware of q2! J. Mol. Graphics Mod. 20, 269-276, (2002)]. Herein, we provide additional evidence that there exists no correlation between the values of q2 for the training set and accuracy of prediction (R2) for the test set and argue that this observation is a general property of any QSAR model developed with LOO cross-validation. We suggest that external validation using rationally selected training and test sets provides a means to establish a reliable QSAR model. We propose several approaches to the division of experimental datasets into training and test sets and apply them in QSAR studies of 48 functionalized amino acid anticonvulsants and a series of 157 epipodophyllotoxin derivatives with antitumor activity. We formulate a set of general criteria for the evaluation of predictive power of QSAR models.

591 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is demonstrated that QSAR models built and validated with the approach have statistically better predictive power than models generated with either random or activity ranking based selection of the training and test sets.
Abstract: One of the most important characteristics of Quantitative Structure Activity Relashionships (QSAR) models is their predictive power. The latter can be defined as the ability of a model to predict accurately the target property (e.g., biological activity) of compounds that were not used for model development. We suggest that this goal can be achieved by rational division of an experimental SAR dataset into the training and test set, which are used for model development and validation, respectively. Given that all compounds are represented by points in multidimensional descriptor space, we argue that training and test sets must satisfy the following criteria: (i) Representative points of the test set must be close to those of the training set; (ii) Representative points of the training set must be close to representative points of the test set; (iii) Training set must be diverse. For quantitative description of these criteria, we use molecular dataset diversity indices introduced recently (Golbraikh, A., J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 40 (2000) 414-425). For rational division of a dataset into the training and test sets, we use three closely related sphere-exclusion algorithms. Using several experimental datasets, we demonstrate that QSAR models built and validated with our approach have statistically better predictive power than models generated with either random or activity ranking based selection of the training and test sets. We suggest that rational approaches to the selection of training and test sets based on diversity principles should be used routinely in all QSAR modeling research.

466 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This critical review re-examines the strategy and the output of the modern QSAR modeling approaches and provides examples and arguments suggesting that current methodologies may afford robust and validated models capable of accurate prediction of compound properties for molecules not included in the training sets.
Abstract: Quantitative Structure Activity Relationship (QSAR) modeling has been traditionally applied as an evaluative approach, i.e., with the focus on developing retrospective and explanatory models of existing data. Model extrapolation was considered if only in hypothetical sense in terms of potential modifications of known biologically active chemicals that could improve compounds' activity. This critical review re-examines the strategy and the output of the modern QSAR modeling approaches. We provide examples and arguments suggesting that current methodologies may afford robust and validated models capable of accurate prediction of compound properties for molecules not included in the training sets. We discuss a data-analytical modeling workflow developed in our laboratory that incorporates modules for combinatorial QSAR model development (i.e., using all possible binary combinations of available descriptor sets and statistical data modeling techniques), rigorous model validation, and virtual screening of available chemical databases to identify novel biologically active compounds. Our approach places particular emphasis on model validation as well as the need to define model applicability domains in the chemistry space. We present examples of studies where the application of rigorously validated QSAR models to virtual screening identified computational hits that were confirmed by subsequent experimental investigations. The emerging focus of QSAR modeling on target property forecasting brings it forward as predictive, as opposed to evaluative, modeling approach.

369 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is suggested that rational approaches to the selection of training and test sets based on diversity principles should be used routinely in all QSAR modelingresearch.
Abstract: One of the most important characteristics of Quantitative Structure Activity Relashionships (QSAR) models is their predictive power. The latter can be defined as the ability of a model to predict accurately the target property (e.g., biological activity) of compounds that were not used for model development. We suggest that this goal can be achieved by rational division of an experimental SAR dataset into the training and test set, which are used for model development and validation, respectively. Given that all compounds are represented by points in multidimensional descriptor space, we argue that training and test sets must satisfy the following criteria: (i) Representative points of the test set must be close to those of the training set; (ii) Representative points of the training set must be close to representative points of the test set; (iii) Training set must be diverse. For quantitative description of these criteria, we use molecular dataset diversity indices introduced recently (Golbraikh, A., J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 40 (2000) 414-425). For rational division of a dataset into the training and test sets, we use three closely related sphere-exclusion algorithms. Using several experimental datasets, we demonstrate that QSAR models built and validated with our approach have statistically better predictive power than models generated with either random or activity ranking based selection of the training and test sets. We suggest that rational approaches to the selection of training and test sets based on diversity principles should be used routinely in all QSAR modeling research.

301 citations


Cited by
More filters
28 Jul 2005
TL;DR: PfPMP1)与感染红细胞、树突状组胞以及胎盘的单个或多个受体作用,在黏附及免疫逃避中起关键的作�ly.
Abstract: 抗原变异可使得多种致病微生物易于逃避宿主免疫应答。表达在感染红细胞表面的恶性疟原虫红细胞表面蛋白1(PfPMP1)与感染红细胞、内皮细胞、树突状细胞以及胎盘的单个或多个受体作用,在黏附及免疫逃避中起关键的作用。每个单倍体基因组var基因家族编码约60种成员,通过启动转录不同的var基因变异体为抗原变异提供了分子基础。

18,940 citations

Book
17 May 2013
TL;DR: This research presents a novel and scalable approach called “Smartfitting” that automates the very labor-intensive and therefore time-heavy and therefore expensive and expensive process of designing and implementing statistical models for regression models.
Abstract: General Strategies.- Regression Models.- Classification Models.- Other Considerations.- Appendix.- References.- Indices.

3,672 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This review summarizes historical and scientific perspectives of Doxil development and lessons learned from its development and 20 years of its use and demonstrates the obligatory need for applying an understanding of the cross talk between physicochemical, nano-technological, and biological principles.

3,189 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is argued that the high value of LOO q2 appears to be the necessary but not the sufficient condition for the model to have a high predictive power, which is the general property of QSAR models developed using LOO cross-validation.
Abstract: Validation is a crucial aspect of any quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) modeling. This paper examines one of the most popular validation criteria, leave-one-out cross-validated R2 (LOO q2). Often, a high value of this statistical characteristic (q2 > 0.5) is considered as a proof of the high predictive ability of the model. In this paper, we show that this assumption is generally incorrect. In the case of 3D QSAR, the lack of the correlation between the high LOO q2 and the high predictive ability of a QSAR model has been established earlier [Pharm. Acta Helv. 70 (1995) 149; J. Chemomet. 10(1996)95; J. Med. Chem. 41 (1998) 2553]. In this paper, we use two-dimensional (2D) molecular descriptors and k nearest neighbors (kNN) QSAR method for the analysis of several datasets. No correlation between the values of q2 for the training set and predictive ability for the test set was found for any of the datasets. Thus, the high value of LOO q2 appears to be the necessary but not the sufficient condition for the model to have a high predictive power. We argue that this is the general property of QSAR models developed using LOO cross-validation. We emphasize that the external validation is the only way to establish a reliable QSAR model. We formulate a set of criteria for evaluation of predictive ability of QSAR models.

3,176 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A set of simple guidelines for developing validated and predictive QSPR models is presented, highlighting the need to establish the domain of model applicability in the chemical space to flag molecules for which predictions may be unreliable, and some algorithms that can be used for this purpose.
Abstract: This paper emphasizes the importance of rigorous validation as a crucial, integral component of Quantitative Structure Property Relationship (QSPR) model development. We consider some examples of published QSPR models, which in spite of their high fitted accuracy for the training sets and apparent mechanistic appeal, fail rigorous validation tests, and, thus, may lack practical utility as reliable screening tools. We present a set of simple guidelines for developing validated and predictive QSPR models. To this end, we discuss several validation strategies including (1) randomization of the modelled property, also called Y-scrambling, (2) multiple leave-many-out cross-validations, and (3) external validation using rational division of a dataset into training and test sets. We also highlight the need to establish the domain of model applicability in the chemical space to flag molecules for which predictions may be unreliable, and discuss some algorithms that can be used for this purpose. We advocate the broad use of these guidelines in the development of predictive QSPR models.

1,838 citations